![]() 898,725,879 visitors served. |
|
![]() Dictionary/ thesaurus | ![]() Medical dictionary | ![]() Legal dictionary | ![]() Financial dictionary | ![]() Acronyms | ![]() Idioms | ![]() Encyclopedia | ![]() Wikipedia encyclopedia | ? |
Affirmative Defense |
Also found in: Wikipedia | 0.04 sec. |
|
A new fact or set of facts that operates to defeat a claim even if the facts supporting that claim are true. A plaintiff sets forth a claim in a civil action by making statements in the document called the complaint. These statements must be sufficient to warrant relief from the court. The defendant responds to the plaintiff's claims by preparing an answer in which the defendant may deny the truth of the plaintiff's allegations or assert that there are additional facts that constitute a defense to the plaintiff's action. For example, a plaintiff may demand compensation for damage done to his or her vehicle in an automobile accident. Without denying responsibility for the accident, the defendant may claim to have an affirmative defense, such as the plain-tiff's contributory Negligence or expiration of the Statute of Limitations. An affirmative defense is also allowed under rules of Criminal Procedure. For example, a defendant accused of assault may claim to have been intoxicated or insane, to have struck out in Self-Defense, or to have had an alibi for the night in question. Any one of these affirmative defenses must be asserted by showing that there are facts in addition to the ones in the indictment or information charging the defendant and that those additional facts are legally sufficient to excuse the defendant. The rules that govern Pleading in most courts require a defendant to raise all affirmative defenses when first responding to the civil claim or criminal charges against him or her. Failure to do so may preclude assertion of that kind of defense later in the trial. affirmative defense n. when a defendant files an answer, in addition to denying some or all of the allegations, he/she can state what are called "affirmative defenses." These defenses can contain allegations, take the initiative against statements of facts contrary to those stated in the original complaint against them, and include various defenses based on legal principles. Many of these defenses fall into the "boilerplate" (stated in routine, non-specific language) category, but one or more of the defenses may help the defendant. |
|
? References in periodicals archive |
|---|
The decisions articulated that where
harassment has occurred but no tangible action has been taken, an
employer could assert an affirmative defense to liability if it has
exercised reason-able care to prevent and correct the sexually harassing
behavior. The keys to proving Saddam guilty are: first, proving that the
crimes occurred, a nearly indisputable fact for which substantial
evidence has been admitted; second, proving that the defendants were
tied to and responsible for the crimes, and finally addressing the
defendants' affirmative defense that their actions were justified. The lower federal court dismissed the lawsuit holding that the
employer took no adverse tangible employment action against her given
that she resigned, enabling the PSP to defend itself under the
Ellerth-Faragher affirmative defense. |
| Free Tools: |
For surfers:
Browser extension |
Word of the Day |
Help
For webmasters: Free content NEW! | Linking | Lookup box | Double-click lookup | Partner with us |
|
|---|